Jona eat your heart out !! ANOTHER BULL... STORY

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

Yes they are at it again........... and i must say i am getting so fed up with these nutters...

Can someone in the scientific world please stop this nonsense ???

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Italy: Birthplace of Roman emperor 'found' in Lazio


Rome, 27 Jan. (AKI) - An international team of archaeologists claims to have unearthed the 2000-year-old birthplace of the Roman emperor, Vespasian, north of the Italian capital. Vespasian ruled the Roman empire in the first century A.D. and was behind the construction of the Colosseum, one of Italy's most popular landmarks.

Archeologists believe they have located his birthplace in the Falacrinae valley near the hill town of Cittareale, 130 km northeast of Rome.

"Ancient Roman historian Suetonius says Vespasian was born in the Falacrinae valley area. Field surveys and information from locals have told us this must be Vespasian's birthplace," one of the project's directors, British archaeologist Helen Patterson told Adnkronos International (AKI).

Vespasian was the ninth Roman emperor, who reigned from 69-79 AD. He was believed to come from humble beginnings and founded the short-lived Flavian dynasty after the civil wars that followed Nero's death in 68 AD.

During recent excavations, the archaeologists uncovered sumptuous marble floors and mosaics at the site of the 3,000-4,000 square metre Villa of Falacrinae, Patterson said.

The team of 30-60 archaeologists recovered pots, numerous coins, ceramic and metal artefacts from the site which is 820 metres above sea level, overlooking the surrounding Falacrinae valley.

The archeologists are hoping to recover more items in fresh excavations in July and August, Patterson said.

Archaelogists from the British School at Rome and the University of Perugia used geophysical surveys to give them an X-ray image of the buried building, Patterson explained.

"It was obviously a very,very big structure and very luxurious," she said adding that the marble used in the villa's floors had been imported from all over the Mediterranean.

"We have also discovered Roman baths, a garden and a dining room and have only excavated a portion of the villa since the dig began in 2007," she said.

The villa lies on a major Roman road, Via Salaria, which connects the capital, Rome, to the northeastern Italian Adriatic coast and that was once used to transport salt.

Italian archaeologist Filippo Coarelli, a retired archaeology professor at Perugia University is the project's co-director.

He told AKI excavations began in the Falacrinae area after a farmer found a block of marble with a Latin inscription on it dedicated to a local chieftain.

The local official is believed to have played a role in the Roman victory over the Italic peoples during the 91-88 BC wars between the Roman Republic and other Italian cities.

Excavations conducted in 2005 uncovered an ancient Christian cemetery and former necropolis at Pallotini, near Cittareale.

Vespasian was the son of Flavius Sabinus, a Roman knight, tax collector and banker. His mother, Vespasia Polla, also belonged to the equestrian order in society but had a brother who entered the Senate.

Little is known about his reign but the former soldier is best known for his fiscal reforms and the consolidation of the empire which generated political stability and a vast Roman building programme including the Colosseum.

"These digs are important for our understanding of ancient Roman history and of the Flavian dynasty," Coarelli said.

"He was a man from the provinces, a self-made man from a bourgeois not an aristocratic family.

"To find the place where Vespasian was born and lived can help us understand his career and the Roman occupation of Italy," Coarelli concluded.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

OOOOH, ITALY WAS OCCUPIED BY THE ROMANS ???


MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[jvrjenivs]

yeah, some people just need attention. And Italian archaeologist seems to be pretty good in that, as are people in some other fields. And why not, this kind of stories publish. (So I think this also is a problem which arrises from Journalism, not only from the archeologists (but they play the main role, of course)

[Doc]

"One of the project's directors, British archaeologist Helen Patterson......."

This sort of name does not appear to be Italian and so I would reexamine the fact that Italian archaelogists need attention.

Henk, the statement I find interesting is that Vespaian had humble beginnings however, the house is lavish? Is that not strange?

Also, there is a translation issue. I speak both Italian and English fluently and sometimes when something is said in English and it was thought in Italian, it sounds goofy at best. I am quite sure that Coarelli knows that the Romans occupied Italy. However, his statement was not meant to read in the fashion you interpreted, Henk. He merely suggests that further knowledge helps further in the understanding of events that lead to whatever the event may be. In this particular case, the beginnings of a man can be used to determine how one may achieves success from nothing in Roman society which CAN be a clue or direct coorelation on how Roman society worked as a unit that led to the occupation of Italy and elsewhere. We seem to foget that we were not there and cannot assume that we know EVERYTHING from a few sources that happened to make it into modern day society. Granted we have to go with what is available but we also have to think about who wrote something and what the motivation was. Here in the US, some of my Eastern Eurpoean friends think that Russia was the main cause for the victory in WWII while my American friends think it was the US and others further think that it was neither except that Germany made mistakes and the other two countries took advantage of the situation. If each of these people that I know wrote a book that survived 2000 years, future generations would be doing exactly what we were: debating the opinion of writers since that is generally the case, opinions not ALWAYS facts.

If you take notice, the statement L made reiterating Coarelli, took many words to explain. His "press" statement required one line in the hopes that others may understand what he is trying to suggest. I am not saying that I am correct, but things should be analyzed more carefully before making a ridiculing remark. Both of you should know this since 1)You are educated 2)You are European just like me and should consider how things become mispoken beacuse of a translation from the native language or do you think that your English is so good that you have never said anything that was misunderstood?

[Jona Lendering]

Well, we seem to have seen the same story, and had similar thoughts: I already noted it here.

[Doc]

Jona,

I was thinking the same thing. However, I was hesitant to mention it because I was not sure.

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

Paolo, of course i am aware of the British archaologist in question. I have read this article in about 5 versions now, and it still proclaims the villa is the birthplace.

Indeed another issue, apart from the obvious occupazione or occupation or whatever he REALLY said about the Romans OCCUPYING ITALY... *Italy did NOT EXIST at that time* , is that the lavishness of the villa, combined with the fact Vespasian was of Equestrian family (Ordo Equestris) is a little strange to say the least... *did not highlight that though.... nor wrote it down.

It might be an imperial villa, it might not be, we will probably never know since the Romans did not use family name plates on their buildings like we do these days...

Its not that Italian archeologists are all bad either, of course they are not.

However, and i wrote about that in other postings, it seems to me that these kind of ridiculous archeological statements are generally more widespread in Italy compared to other countries ( Hawass excluded ) .

Of course i have not made a survey of news clippings so no data to substantiate it, but it would be a nice subject to investigate.

As Jona wrote, and has written in several blogs on pseudo scholarship, wishful thinking in the archeological world is exponentially increasing.

Wether or not it has to do with funding, name making or any other reason i do not know.

However, i do find it more and more irritating and ridiculous.

It does not give science a good name imho, especially when serious scholars attach their names to these statements,a habit which is also on the increase...

M.VIB.M.

PS: i wish the Ctesias Scale would be mandatory implemented worldwide henceforth !!

[Doc]

Henk,

When you are referring to a modern audience you have to use a descriptor that gives a reference point. I know that there was no Italy at the time, however, what would you have him call it when describing a geographic place, country or region to the public? He has to say the Italic peninsula, Italy, or something along those lines. He cannot sit there and list Etruria.......and all the other places that composed the peninsula.

I would agree however, that a better explanation would have been: How the Romans conquered what is known today as Italy. This is the best solution since it is the most accurate and tangible that can be applied to the general public.

When talking about Native Americans, it is always referred as the North American, American........we do not say a vast land of fields with mountains where these Indians ran around. We say Native Americans. Were these people Americans? Certainly not since Amerigo Vespucci was from Europe and there was no America when the pilgrims landed. Nonetheless, when describing the Indians they become Native Americans even though when the pilgrims came it was still the New World.

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

True Paolo, the so called Native Americans did not call their lands or their people American or even Native...

Same with the word heathen * Pagani * for someone refusing to believe Christian doctrine, as if Roman religio in itself was not a valid religio..

Its in the eye of the beholder indeed, and whats in a name...

Still these remarks on names and peoples and lands should in my view be made very carefully, like you state, "what is known today as Italy"

Which still leaves out the fact that Vespasian was born long since the Romans concquered the Italian peninsula...

The interesting part in Vespasian's life is how he joined the Cursus Honorum, and which factions or beneficarii/Patroni supported him in being elected in various offices like it is written on this site:

http://www.roman-emperors.org/vespasia.htm

M.VIB.M.

[Doc]

I agree Henk about you last statement. I too took notice of that. The peninsula was conquered by Vespasians time. I think that maybe Coarelli was trying to look at it from the point of how someone could rise through the ranks and achieve so much and that it would explain why such a people were so powerful. However, I agree that the choice of words should be better.

Yes, I have had this debate with more than one priest. I am Roman Catholic and cannot digest when people say "those pagans" and yet the Roman Catholic Church says they are tolerant of other religions unlike all the rest. Thus the way people see it, since Paganism is not popluar today like it once was, it cannot have been a legitimate or real religion since a real religion would till survive today. Not to mention the eternal debate of wether God exists or not. The world argues about this question as if someone has actually seen God. I'll stop here before I go O.T. or offend someone.

[Jona Lendering]

i wish the Ctesias Scale would be mandatory implemented worldwide henceforth !!

I think that we get the journalism we deserve. But we're not without instruments. What we can do, is write letters to newspapers, explaining their errors and pointing them to good journalists. It may take time, but in the end, we get there.

[jvrjenivs]

This sort of name does not appear to be Italian and so I would reexamine the fact that Italian archaelogists need attention.

Both of you should know this since 1)You are educated 2)You are European just like me and should consider how things become mispoken beacuse of a translation from the native language or do you think that your English is so good that you have never said anything that was misunderstood?

Yeah, I see your point and I know my English is way from proper (but that is my Dutch also), but I was referring to the general thing. It happens over and over again, when a luxury villa was found 'it is said to be of the emperor'. Think about the Armatura della colchide (or whatever the name is called) which was in the news as a big discovery some time ago. Then, not only Italians have this, as I can also come up with this kind of news from 'the thomb (and remains) of Jesus or Maria Magdelena' etc.

[popularis]

Yes they are at it again........... and i must say i am getting so fed up with these nutters...

It's a relatively old story, see the rogueclassicism post here:

http://rogueclassicism.com/2009/08/12/h ... dormiebat/

and Mary Beard's take on it here:

http://timesonline.typepad.com/dons_lif ... ve-it.html

In general, it's a typical archeology story really. There's a good chance that this is a villa belonging to the Flavii (right place, right dating, right level of conspicuous wealth), but beyond that... Note that the archaeologists involved, even - I think - Coarelli (who is sometimes, to my mind, overly optimistic in identifying structures) don't explicitly claim it as Vespasian's birthplace. But the suggestion that it might be makes for a good bit of copy, and so the media runs it as a big story and then shoves the cautionary notes in at the end. It's like any number of "medical breakthrough" stories really - in order to get the public interested in things, the media sensationalises them. Sadly, the media probably has to, otherwise no-one (beyond those who would have been interested anyway) would read it.

Even so, it's an interesting dig on what could be a significant site.

Filippo Coarelli...told AKI excavations began in the Falacrinae area after a farmer found a block of marble with a Latin inscription on it dedicated to a local chieftain.

The local official is believed to have played a role in the Roman victory over the Italic peoples during the 91-88 BC wars between the Roman Republic and other Italian cities.

Now that is an interesting inscription! Anyone have text or piccies? It would be really nice to link Vespasian to a social war 'loyalist' (cf. the family of Velleius Paterculus), although we might expect some mention of it in biographical info (is there any mention of it? I really should check...). Even if we can't link Vespasian to the villa, it would be a lovely bit of evidence.

Blue skies

Tom

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

Bello Socii :

The War

The Social War began in 91 BC when the Italian allies revolted. However, it is important to note that none of the Latin allies revolted, remaining loyal to Rome, with the one exception of Venusia. The rebellious allies showed their intentions of not just separating from Rome, but also forming an independent nation, called Italia, and forming a capital at Corfinium (in modern-day Abruzzo), which was renamed Italica. To pay for the troops, they created their own coinage, which was used as propaganda against Rome. These coins depict eight warriors taking an oath, probably representing the Marsi, Picentines, Paeligni, Marrucini, Vestini, Frentani, Samnites and Hirpini[3].

Their soldiers were battle-hardened, most of them having served in the Roman armies. The 12 allies of Italia were originally able to field 100,000 men. The Italians divided this force according to their positions within Italy.[4]

* Quintus Poppaedius Silo had overall command the "Marsic Group", as consul.
* Gaius Papius Mutilus had overall command the "Samnite Group", as consul.
* Titus Lafrenius commanded the Marsi to 90 BC, when he was killed in action. He was succeeded by Fraucus.
* Titus Vettius Scato commanded the Paeligni to 88 BC, when he committed suicide.
* Gaius Pontidius probably commanded the Vestini, probably at least until 89 BC.
* Herius Asinius commanded the Marrucini until 89 BC, when he was killed in action. He was succeeded by Obsidius who was also killed in action.
* Gaius Vidacilius commanded the Picentes until 89BC, when he committed suicide.
* Publius Praesentius probably commanded the Frentani, probably throughout the war.
* Numerius Lucilius probably commanded the Hirpini until 89BC, when he seems to have been succeeded by Minatus Iegius (or Minius Iegius).
* Lucius Cluentius commanded the Pompeiani in 89 BC when he was killed in action.
* Titus Herennius probably commanded the Venusini throughout the war.
* Trebatius may have commanded the Iapygii throughout the war.
* Marcus Lamponius commanded the Lucani throughout the war.
* Marius Egnatius commanded the Samnites until 88 BC when he was killed in action. He was succeeded by Pontius Telesinus who was also killed in action that year.

It was necessary for Rome to survive the first onslaught as this would discourage further defections and also they would be able to call on help from their provinces as well as from client kingdoms. One of the two separate theatres of war was assigned to each of the consuls of 90 BC. In the north the consul Publius Rutilius Lupus was advised by Gaius Marius and Pompeius Strabo; in the south the consul Lucius Julius Caesar had Lucius Cornelius Sulla and Titus Didius.

Events in 90 BC:

* Roman consul Strabo successfully besieged Asculum
* Rutilius was defeated and killed in Tolenus Valley
* Caepio was destroyed by Poppaedius
* Marius was able to retrieve these losses and was left in sole command
* Besieged Aesernia — a key fortress which covered the communication between the north and south areas — forced it to surrender
* Papius Mutilus burst into southern Campania and won over many towns and held them until defeated by Caesar
* Other Italian commanders lead successful raids into Apulia and Lucania

Despite these losses the Romans managed to stave off total defeat and hang on. In 89 B.C. both consuls went to the northern front whilst Sulla took sole command of the southern front.

Events in 89 BC:

* Lucius Porcius Cato (one of the two consuls) defeated and killed
* Strabo (other consul) left in sole command – decisive engagement defeated Italian Army of 60,000 men – after success forces Asculum to surrender
* Sulla moved to the offensive — he defeated a Samnite army
* Recovered some of the major cities in Campania

By 88 BC the war was largely over except for the Samnites (the old rivals of Rome) who still held out. It is likely that the war would have continued a lot longer had Rome not made concessions to their allies.
[edit] Roman concessions to the Allies

L. Julius Caesar proposed the Lex Julia during his consulship which he carried before his office ended. The law offered full citizenship to all Latin and Italian communities who had not revolted.

However, the law offered the option of citizenship to whole communities and not to individuals. This meant that each individual community had to pass the law, most likely by a vote in assembly, before it could take effect. It was also possible under the Lex Julia for citizenship to be granted as a reward for distinguished military service in the field.

It is assumed that the Lex Julia was closely followed by a supplementary statute, the Lex Plautia Papiria, which stated that a registered male of an allied state could obtain Roman citizenship by presenting himself to a Roman praetor within 60 days of the passing of the law. This statute enabled inhabitants of towns disqualified by the Lex Julia to apply for citizenship if they desired. Roman citizenship and the right to vote was limited, as always in the ancient world, by the requirement of physical appearance on voting day. After 88 BC candidates regularly paid the expenses (at least partially) for their supporters to travel to Rome in order to vote.

(WIKI)

M.VIB.M.

[Jona Lendering]

Even so, it's an interesting dig on what could be a significant site.

And that's why they just could have told the truth. Coarelli's claims are just as damaging to the reputation of modern archaeology as Zahi Hawass supporting the theory about the tomb of Cleopatra.

This is worse than pseudoscholarship; people are perfectly aware that Von Däniken is not a real scholar.* But people are not aware how Coarelli and Hawass and a couple of others are cooking up the facts. I predict that within five years, we will have an archaeological "Climategate". After that, no archaeological monument list will protect monuments. And it's archaeologists themselves who are to blame.

*
This may sound strange, but read this, especially the part on "Pseudoscholarship versus Outdated Information".

[popularis]

Even so, it's an interesting dig on what could be a significant site.

And that's why they just could have told the truth. Coarelli's claims are just as damaging to the reputation of modern archaeology as Zahi Hawass supporting the theory about the tomb of Cleopatra.

This is worse than pseudoscholarship;

Do you really think so? I'm not sure that I agree (although I see your point). All I've read from Coarelli on this has been accurate, if a little optimistic - and if the head of the excavation isn't optimistic, then who will be? What he, and the others involved in this dig are doing (rather like the coverage of the new work at Portus last year), is giving juicy, but honest, quotes. They know that "this could be the birthplace of the emperor Vespasian, and if so, it's one of the most significant Roman finds of the last ten years" can become the headline "EMPEROR'S BIRTHPLACE DISCOVERED, ARCHAEOLOGISTS HAIL MOST SIGNIFICANT DISCOVERY OF THE MILLENIUM". Thus ensuring them publicity and - most importantly - increasing their chances of renewed funding.

I don't think it's necessarily healthy, but stories like this are a world away from quackery. This is a real site, and none of the claims I see in direct quotes are fantastical. I've read the passage you cite, but I don't think even the (I think indirect quote) "there can be little doubt that this is the Emperor's villa" is pseudoscholarship. There's a difference between not showing scholarly caution (and many from non Anglo/Germanic academic cultures believe that we are unhealthily bound by unnecessary scholarly caution), and pseudoscholarship. It's worth remembering that there isn't any historian that doesn't overstate the importance of his or her field and period. If we didn't think it was more interesting or important than anything else, why would we do it? It's not for the money...

blue skies

Tom